An Uachtarain's visit to Britain

Betsy Og said:
Huge amount of tweeting last night to the effect that lucky it wasnt yer man from dragons den, Gallagher. Memorably described by someone as "that Fianna Fail bagman".
Click to expand...

Either of the Mary's would have been better.
 
I read the two speeches this morning. I thought the Queen's was simple and extemely well written. Unfortunately I can't say the same about the Presidents. I thought it was terrible. Somebody wanted to make themselves sound clever.

The speech earlier in the day to the Houses of Parliment was much more intersting especially when he mentioned his own Father fighting for Irish Independence. I sometimes forget how recent and relevant these events were for some people. Michael D himself must have wondered what his own Father would have thought of the whole thing.
 
The Queen's was well written, but delivered quite flatly I thought.

Michael D's was lighter on content, but I think he delivered it with (a bit) more energy.
I'm sure neither he nor the Queen wrote the scripts themselves anyway. They may have had input but I think Michael D has a couple of speechwriters (and the Queen probably has a roomful of them) and I am sure the civil servants on both sides of the pond hada huge say in what went into the speeches.
 
After a momentous day 1 it fairly slipped back the agenda. Still a good success though.

One interesting point is the suggestion that there'll be royal representation at 1916 commemorations. Not so sure about that TBH, isnt it a bit like you Da turning up at a house party?, you cant exactly let your hair down.

Picture the scene, tricolour in hand, whipped into a nationalistic fervour, and who appears only a representative of the British Empire, wont it be like the appearance of a pantomine villain?? Yes, yes, I know we're soooo over that and all the rest, but it strikes me as an unnecessary risk.

If I were a royal would I really want to go to a celebration of someone attacking the empire?, you cant exactly cheer can you? I just think it might mean the mood will 'sombreised' out of respect - whereas there will be a fair constituency who will want to cheer, wave a flag and sing along to Ding Dong Denny O'Reilly stuff. & worse, it would be a real pity if it goes like the visit of the Queen with empty streets and people behing barriers - it should be a celebration for the people by the people, not some diplomatic exclusive type stage managing.

Plus I dont know how we'll tread the fine line of celebration without it turning into a Celtic jerseys & Dutch Gold scanger-fest like the biggest Paddy's Day excuse for going mental.
 
I think a representative of Liz's would help to stop the Provo's taking ownership of the 1916 celebrations which would be a good thing.
 
I think there was a statement of intent that the government put on a big show for the 90th so I think "the republican movement" will be crowded out by officaldom (unless, of course, by then they are part of officialdom...be afraid, be very afraid....).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register